in my city, and many others, the murder rate is significantly–by a wide margin–more in certain poor areas than others…now, if there is free will, why does it appear–beyond dispute–that these areas have a bigger problem with free will[when it comes to the sin of murder]] than the wealthy areas???

[quote="WINGS_DAY, post:3, topic:274488"]
so it is not TOTAL free will, because the environmental factors figure into the situation and are different in the wealthy areas???ty

[/quote]

Of course it is. Temptation does not infringe upon free will. You have to make a decision to murder someone, and trying to blame it on someone (or something) else is not just wrong, it's cowardly, unless of course you have a mental condition or something.

[quote="YoungTradCath, post:5, topic:274488"]
Of course it is. Temptation does not infringe upon free will. You have to make a decision to murder someone, and trying to blame it on someone (or something) else is not just wrong, it's cowardly, unless of course you have a mental condition or something.

[/quote]

so, my original question, how come they ''choose'' murder so much more in the poor areas??the numbers/facts are undeniable that there are a lot more murders in ''poor'' areas

You’re asking a question that requires a long complex answer, which I do not have time to give. There are a number of factors which cause people to murder other people. Everything from biological, socio-economics, psychologically, etc. make people more susceptible to murdering people. People still have free will to decide whether or not they are going to murder someone, but they have, let us say, less ability to make the decision to not murder people.

Murder in and of itself is a complex issue. Are you indeed talking about murder alone, or are you including manslaughter as well?

[quote="Deo_Gratias42, post:8, topic:274488"]
You're asking a question that requires a long complex answer, which I do not have time to give. There are a number of factors which cause people to murder other people. Everything from biological, socio-economics, psychologically, etc. make people more susceptible to murdering people. People still have free will to decide whether or not they are going to murder someone, but they have, let us say, less ability to make the decision to not murder people.

Murder in and of itself is a complex issue. Are you indeed talking about murder alone, or are you including manslaughter as well?

[/quote]

actually, I'm looking for an answer such as yours----so, less ability--so ''less free will'' because of the factors you mention??so it is not TOTAL free will???these factors effect people's actions???

actually, I’m looking for an answer such as yours----so, less ability–so ‘‘less free will’’ because of the factors you mention??so it is not TOTAL free will???these factors effect people’s actions???

No. Each person has the same amount of free will, but the inclination to commit crimes is higher in poorer areas. This doesn’t negate or lessen free will. The inclination to NOT commit crimes like theft and murder is higher in wealthier areas. This also does not lessen free will, it just simply provides an impetus one way or the other.

Your logic could also be applied to the wealthier areas: A wealthier person has more resources and also has more to lose by committing crime. Therefore, they have less free will b/c their decisions are biased against committing crime.

If you want to say one group doesn’t have TOTAL free will b/c of their environmental factors than the same goes for the other group.

If you have a choice you have free will in its entirety. While the things which either directly or indirectly influence a person’s choices can lessen or diminish the culpability of sin; they can never diminish or lessen the amount of free will a person has if the ability to make a choice exists.

You either have free will or you don't. There can be no such thing as using 50% free will.

Both groups have the same ability to avoid murdering someone but not necessarily the same motivation to avoid murdering someone.

If I’m starving and want to steal bread, I have the same ability to choose to steal or not steal bread as someone who is not starving but I MAY have a much stronger motivation to steal the bread. Our motivations are going to be based on what we value. It is possible that I may so highly value obedience that despite my intense hunger I do not steal. In this case, taking the bread may not be theft at all, but you get my point.

The wealthier group has more resources and more to lose by committing crime so they typically have a stronger motivation to NOT commit crime, however they still have the ABILITY to choose to steal, murder etc… if they wish. Likewise, living in a poor area with less resources could be a greater motivation to murder but if someone more highly values righteousness they will more likely choose not to murder. Of course, we have a choice regarding how much value we place on our motivations.

Ultimately, God will be the judge as to who is culpable for their actions and who is not.

If you have a choice you have free will in its entirety. While the things which either directly or indirectly influence a person’s choices can lessen or diminish the culpability of sin; they can never diminish or lessen the amount of free will a person has if the ability to make a choice exists.

You either have free will or you don’t. There can be no such thing as using 50% free will.

well, then, back to my point<>how do you explain the huge differences in where and by whom the sins of murders are committed? where I live-a major city- the majority of the murders are committed by a minority of people in one certain area…if everyone has the ‘same’ amount of free will/ if free will at all, I would think the murders would be spread out over the entire population, but that is not the case…AND a big part of the murders that occur out of the poor areas, are committed by poor people not from the wealthy area…

Both groups have the same ability to avoid murdering someone but not necessarily the same motivation to avoid murdering someone.

If I’m starving and want to steal bread, I have the same ability to choose to steal or not steal bread as someone who is not starving but I MAY have a much stronger motivation to steal the bread. Our motivations are going to be based on what we value. It is possible that I may so highly value obedience that despite my intense hunger I do not steal. In this case, taking the bread may not be theft at all, but you get my point.

The wealthier group has more resources and more to lose by committing crime so they typically have a stronger motivation to NOT commit crime, however they still have the ABILITY to choose to steal, murder etc… if they wish. Likewise, living in a poor area with less resources could be a greater motivation to murder but if someone more highly values righteousness they will more likely choose not to murder. Of course, we have a choice regarding how much value we place on our motivations.

Ultimately, God will be the judge as to who is culpable for their actions and who is not.

have you ever been hungry for long periods of time??? like weeks??I’d bet all my money ANYONE who is very hungry, would steal to get food if that was the only way to get it…or else they’d die!!!..doesn’t the poor boy with no love/discipline/parents/education/etc have a much greater motivation-as you say-much different forces on him–to steal/etc than the wealthy boy??

well, then, back to my point<>how do you explain the huge differences in where and by whom the sins of murders are committed? where I live-a major city- the majority of the murders are committed by a minority of people in one certain area…if everyone has the ‘same’ amount of free will/ if free will at all, I would think the murders would be spread out over the entire population, but that is not the case…AND a big part of the murders that occur out of the poor areas, are committed by poor people not from the wealthy area…

Your point isn’t a point at all by rather a situation you expect me to speculate on, which I will not do. From what I can assess -based on this thread - is you have no clue why these murders are happening or what the reasons are behind these things so your example is useless in determining any conclusion.

[quote="WINGS_DAY, post:3, topic:274488"]
so it is not TOTAL free will, because the environmental factors figure into the situation and are different in the wealthy areas???ty

[/quote]

There is literally not a single person in the universe who believes in such a thing as "total free will" as you apparently define it.

Man is by nature is unfree. He does not choose to come into existence. He is brought into it. He does not choose to be male or female. He does not choose to be of any particular race or nationality or SES. He chooses neither his strengths nor his weaknesses.

"Free will" is simply the unfettering of the will from the intellect. However barbarous and primitive people in the ghetto may become, they do not change this fact.

[quote="WINGS_DAY, post:14, topic:274488"]
have you ever been hungry for long periods of time??? like weeks??I'd bet all my money ANYONE who is very hungry, would steal to get food if that was the only way to get it...or else they'd die!!!!..doesn't the poor boy with no love/discipline/parents/education/etc have a much greater motivation-as you say-much different forces on him--to steal/etc than the wealthy boy??

[/quote]

Of course. I find it hard to fast for even one day. What I am saying is that yes poor people have different factors in their life that motivate their choices, just like wealthier people have factors in their life which motivate their choices. But both people can reason and choose a path in life. Otherwise, no poor person would ever do right and no wealthy person would ever do wrong. Each person has the ability to make a choice and that is what free will is. As to TOTAL free will vs Non-Total free will. I have never heard of that distinction in philosophy. But of course, that doesn't mean there isn't one.

[quote="WINGS_DAY, post:14, topic:274488"]
have you ever been hungry for long periods of time??? like weeks??I'd bet all my money ANYONE who is very hungry, would steal to get food if that was the only way to get it...or else they'd die!!!!..doesn't the poor boy with no love/discipline/parents/education/etc have a much greater motivation-as you say-much different forces on him--to steal/etc than the wealthy boy??

[/quote]

I'd take that bet and win. There have been countless occasions which a person is starving or should be starving and does not steal or commit any crime or sin in order to satisfy themselves.

As a boy in the middle of wealth and poor (poor now) I have stolen. it was for the pride in action and thrill more than anything. not for substance or continuation. there are always different factors that may influence one person more than the other. that's life - and actually a part of a world with free will.

For without influence, could there really be a choice? Influence is after all variables/options. No influence means no real options. Just an answer or action of no reason (or at least no human reason/purpose); which would be destiny.

Do not forget early Christianity. it was once punishable by death. Those gathered would be given the option to live or die; proclaim Jesus or proclaim Zeus (Its Roman history - look up nero). Under your theory everyone should have proclaimed Zeus (2), however many did not. they chose Jesus (1)

if there is any question if we are living in either free will or destiny...the answer is both

death = destiny (which would follow there being no option)
how we meet death = free will

Your point isn’t a point at all by rather a situation you expect me to speculate on, which I will not do. From what I can assess -based on this thread - is you have no clue why these murders are happening or what the reasons are behind these things so your example is useless in determining any conclusion.

obviously most of these murders are committed by people whose parents did not do a good job[if they had parents around] <>my simple question is why is the sin of murder committed mostly in ONE area instead of all over the region, [especially since there are MORE people outside the murder area] IF everyone has ‘equal’ free will??